[2024:RJ-JP:26269]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16333/2023
Ravi Kant Sharma S/o Suraj Sharma, Aged About 32 Years, R/o
C-46, Saraswati Nagar, Sushilpura, Sodala, Jaipur Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Sanjay Gupta S/o Nand Kishore Gupta, R/o C9, Barwada
House Colony, Ajmer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harsh Tikoo
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Riyasat Ali-PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Order
31/05/2024
1. Apprehending his arrest in connection with FIR No.84/2023
registered at Police Station Jyoti Nagar, District Jaipur City (South)
for the offence(s) under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC, the
petitioner has preferred this anticipatory bail application under
Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The allegations
levelled in the FIR are totally false. The petitioner has not forged
any documents. The allegations of opening the fake accounts in
the name of Ajay Gupta, Siya Gupta, Sanjay Gupta and Nand
Kishore Gupta are totally false. He further submits that custodial
investigation of the accused petitioner is not required, therefore,
the anticipatory bail of accused-petitioner may be allowed.
[2024:RJ-JP:26269] [CRLMB-16333/2023]
(2 of 2)
3. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposes the
anticipatory bail application and produces the factual report. The
same is taken on record.
4. I have considered the overall allegations levelled in the FIR
and contentions made by the counsel for the parties.
5. In the factual report, the investigating agency after collecting
the documents, arrived at the conclusion that petitioner opened
the accounts in the name of Ajay Gupta, Siya Gupta, Sanjay
Gupta and Nand Kishore Gupta and also updated the mobile
numbers and after forging the documents, transferred the LIC
Policies of complainant Sanjay Gupta, his brother and daughter in
the forged accounts. Thus, it is apparent that petitioner is involved
in the said offence, therefore, considering the gravity of the
offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory
bail.
6. Hence, the bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
on behalf of accused-petitioner is hereby dismissed.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J
237-Rahul Joshi